Cant find answer to this anywhere.

So when a throw is made to 1B it checks arm strength and acc. of the thrower. After tht "check", if it is deemed a good throw does the 1B always catch it or does his glove factor in. If he has an awful rating is there a chance he drops the throw?



On the other side of it, if the thrower is deemed to have a failed throw is there a chance that with a great glove rating the 1B makes a great play on the ball to catch it?

I would assume that all the ratings (thrower's arm strength and arm accuracy, and receiver's range and glove) come into play.

SiteStaff has said that 1B range rating factors into saving bad throws (update of a year or so ago). tec's assumption about the 1B glove rating factoring into whether he drops the throw is so logical as to seem a safe assumption, but I've never seen it stated anywhere.

Without seeing the code in the game engine, all we have are logical assumptions.

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 12/31/2009Without seeing the code in the game engine, all we have are logical assumptions

Well, we have what SiteStaff tells us. That might be better than logic.

There's a sort of hierarchy of evidence when making judgments about what works in HBD. I would rate it as something like: (1) what someone has done a careful, systematic statistical study and found to be true; (2) what more than one veteran player has thoughtfully but not systematically observed to be true; (3) what SiteStaff says to be true; (4) logical assumptions; (5) wild-*** guesses.

Most of what we do in HBD is based on (4), but there's a fair bit of (2), (3), and (5) mixed in, and very little (1) (although people using well-run regression models to evaluate players are getting there).

Quote: Originally Posted By dedelman on 12/31/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 12/31/2009
Without seeing the code in the game engine, all we have are logical assumptions.

Well, we have what SiteStaff tells us. That might be better than logic.

There's a sort of hierarchy of evidence when making judgments about what works in HBD. I would rate it as something like: (1) what someone has done a careful, systematic statistical study and found to be true; (2) what more than one veteran player has thoughtfully but not systematically observed to be true; (3) what SiteStaff says to be true; (4) logical assumptions; (5) wild-*** guesses.

Most of what we do in HBD is based on (4), but there's a fair bit of (2), (3), and (5) mixed in, and very little (1) (although people using well-run regression models to evaluate players are getting there).

Doubt it.

:).

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 12/31/2009Without seeing the code in the game engine, all we have are logical assumptions

And judging by most forum threads, even logical assumptions are far outnumbered by illogical assumptions, pet theories, sarcasm and red herrings. What fun!

Red herrings! You're posts are so funny - you should post more often.